Last in Parliament October 2015, as NDPMP for Louis-Hébert (Québec)

Statements in the House

Mr. Speaker, as members of their committee on rights and humanity, a number of students at De Rochebelle high school expressed their disapproval of the continued involvement of child soldiers in several armed conflicts around the world.

Consequently, they wanted to speak out against the abysmal psychological and physical condition of these children and raise public awareness about this issue.

To that end, they prepared a petition, which they circulated this spring. They collected 346 signatures. I am pleased to present this petition on their behalf.

Mr. Speaker, as this parliamentary session winds down, let me tell you about the injustice one of my constituents is facing.

The son of a soldier, Edney Charbonneau joined our armed forces himself. After eight years of service, he became a federal government customs officer and investigator. He obtained a very high security clearance.

For his service he received commendations from Prime Minister Martin and Prime Minister Chrétien. Unfortunately, now that he has reached retirement age, Mr. Charbonneau cannot get his old age pension. Why not? He is not a recognized Canadian citizen. When his father was deployed to England during World War II, he married a British woman. Mr. Charbonneau, the child of that union, arrived in Canada at the age of two months.

Regardless of the circumstances—worthy of a novel in themselves—that led to this injustice, this man spent his entire life in Canada and paid all his taxes like a good citizen. Mr. Charbonneau deserves his old age pension, and this government should remove all the obstacles in recognition of his life's work.

Something about the government's attitude toward this subject really bothers me. They are acting as though mechanisms to ensure public safety were not already in place. Specifically, I would like to talk about the Parole Board of Canada. Its mandate gives it the power to refuse parole when public safety is at risk, and victims have opportunities to have their say.

My question for my colleague across the way is therefore a simple one. What tools would his bill create that the Parole Board of Canada does not already have? I do not see what this bill adds.

What I found really interesting about his speech was the way he put the bill into context. All of a sudden, at the last minute, the government decided that the Senate bill is urgent.

I would like to remind everyone that in 2010 the President of the Treasury Board, who was then the minister of industry, started a discussion about a digital economy strategy, a public consultation that never saw the light of day and that never produced any results. I think that when a bill like this comes from the Senate, that is pretty simplistic.

Given the growing importance of the digital economy and our digital lives, broadly speaking, does my colleague not think that we should simply drop this bill and rethink government regulations relating to the digital world?

Mr. Speaker, the people of Lévis are still waiting for the government to take action on the short-term renewal of our fleet of supply ships. Hundreds of jobs are at stake here.

The Davie shipyard submitted a credible proposal to the government, but the Conservatives keep refusing to follow through. Time is of the essence. In the meantime, the delays keep piling up, and I should point out that the navy really needs these ships.

Will the government stop postponing its decision and finally make one?

Mr. Speaker, decades of negligence by the Conservative and Liberal governments have led to a $172 billion deficit in municipal infrastructure. That is not trivial. Our cities, such as Quebec City, need investment in order to improve the quality of life of their citizens. The best example is the Quebec Bridge, a file that has been dragging on for far too long.

By increasing transfers, in a stable and predictable way, the NDP is committed to being a reliable partner to our cities.

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' disastrous management of military procurement is having a major impact on our navy.

It will be years before the new ships are ready. The Davie Shipyard proposed a solution to meet our needs in the short term, but it has still not heard back from the government about it. Now, the government is telling us that it needs more time.

Can the government explain the reason for this delay, which is jeopardizing hundreds of jobs and putting our country in a difficult position?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to get back to what the member said earlier in response to my first question. He spoke about insurance for small companies. However, a small company was involved in the incident in Lac-Mégantic, unfortunately. It is clear that what is currently in the bill would not be enough to cover another incident of that scope, which I certainly hope never happens.

Would the member be prepared to look at increasing the minimum amount of insurance in light of what we already know?

Mr. Speaker, the bill is obviously a step in the right direction. It could, however, be improved, which is what a debate is for.

In light of the new products being transported by train, for example, more volatile products that the companies themselves struggle to categorize, does my colleague opposite think that the existing minimum levels are high enough? If not, what does he suggest?